An episode of Longmire featured on Netflix (Season 6, Episode 6) provides an accurate portrayal of the over-reach of laws into parental choice and rights. After a teacher intervenes in the lives of one of her students, she enlists the help of an attorney to get custody of the child who has contracted scarlet fever and whose parents have chosen the Native American way of medical treatment.

The attorney goes before the Tribal Council to plead the child's case. One of the tribal members asks the attorney if she is certain the child will die without Western medical care. The attorney replies no, that she isn't certain the child will die, just as he cannot be certain the child will live if he does not receive conventional care. She adds, "it's not up to us to decide". The tribal councilman points out that the attorney is deciding, making a judgement using the practices of Western medicine, effectively imposing the state's will upon that of the family. She is making a prognosis about the child's future based on rules of Western medicine and "ripping him" from his home.

"It's just temporary custody," she maintains.

"So you say," he interjects. "But things don't always work like that. I was seven when I was taken from my home. White man said it was for my health and safety. My health and safety were never at risk, and I imagine this is a story that many of us here could tell. The "wisdom of the white man; has so often been detrimental to our nation, but it's staggering how hard we've had to fight for the right to raise our own children in the way we see fit."

I highly recommend watching the full episode of Longmire to experience the weight of this realistic depiction of the reality of the loss of parental rights.

Modern medicine is a belief system

This dramatization demonstrates how the modern medical system, which is a belief system of its own sort, has been imposed - not just upon the Native Americans whose land we invaded and took control of not so long ago - but upon every citizen of the U.S. who chooses something other than Western medicine, both for themselves and their children. We can say this is a belief system because there exists an abundance of opposing documentation and science showing inherent flaws and risks of this system, that conventional proponents of this system continue in their failure to acknowledge, upholding only "science" and references which support their own beliefs and practices.

The tribal councilman emphasized that the attorney was attempting to impose her judgement upon how a family should treat their son's illness, according to a set of standards decided upon by doctors and scientists who rely solely upon the tenets of conventional medical treatment. Who should have the right to decide?

The Native American people were living in harmony with nature when groups of settlers came to this continent. Those who settled here from the Old World usurped the resources, knowledge and land of these tribes and gradually took for themselves. In doing so, they also imposed a modern way of approaching nearly every facet of living, including health treatments; a way that is now in the Top 3 causes of mortality, according to Johns Hopkins University in 2016.

It goes without saying, we should absolutely be granted freedom to question and go outside of treatment parameters or guidelines of any system on that list. Not only should we be allowed to question and make other choices, we should also be free from bullying, coercion, and threats into compliance under a system whose so-called merit doesn't measure up to its track record.

Medical treatments are not the gold standard

Conventional medicine can and does cause further damage and death to those receiving it. It time we openly acknowledge this fact without fear of reproach, loss of livelihood or life, or criminal consequences.

Although this is a fictional story, its lessons are based on all-too-real events that happen in the world regularly. The ethical dilemmas presented here are based upon scenarios that can and do occur in communities, neighborhoods and families every day. In our own state (ID), a family experienced CPS stepping in and taking their brand new baby after birth because the mother was pronounced incapable of caring for the infant due to her diagnosed medical condition, cerbral palsy. The mother's medical condition was not life-threatening nor debilitating such that it compromises her ability to care for her infant. She also lives with the baby's father and grandfather. The parents were able to recover their child after 8 days of CPS managed care and a police report that contained multiple mistruths about the family's situation. Read more here and here about this case.

When we decide to take a child away from its home because we believe he or she is not receiving "adequate" or "appropriate" medical treatment, we are imposing our belief system upon that family and removing the child from its familiar environment, and ultimately, against the will of the parents. Do we consider the effects of how that removal can harm or damage the child? Or, are we so insistent on doing what the human-made "law" dictates, ultimately we lose sight of what violates natural laws that inherently no one or nothing may take from us?

Parental rights = unalienable rights

In this country, our Declaration of Independence guarantees us freedom and the right to our personal beliefs, which include religious beliefs. The Native Americans have their own personal and religious beliefs, which have they have been forced to suppress and discard because of White culture. Similarly, modern tenets of "science" and "medicine" have been increasingly imposed upon anyone choosing alternatives to conventional care. We are not permitted to impose our belief system of alternative care upon the majority, nor would we attempt to do so. Yet, if we possess unalienable rights and freedoms specifically outlined in the Declaration of Independence, why then does ANY system have the right to impose its beliefs and practices upon us?

***Boise ID and SURROUNDING RESIDENTS!***

Thank you for attending the print hearing for RS 25728. This will become a bill to be voted upon by committee over the course of this legislative session.

Why is this legislation important and should be heard by the Senate Committee of Health & Welfare?

Because of two state statutes, one for schools & one for daycares regarding vaccine exemptions in Idaho.

The statutes require a signed statement from a parent or guardian when invoking religious or philosophical exemption. The state health department, when writing the associated administrative rule, decided to add that the parent statement 'must be on a form provided by the dept.' Then they created an intrusive, incriminating form requesting confidential medical information.

The RS 25728 (**soon to have its very own bill number) adds a sentence to each of the statutes clarifying that the parent statement is not required to be made on any particular form from anyone; and a simple letter from a parent is sufficient.